Harry Potter vs. Twilight

What Twilight has going for it debunked Pt. 1

1. The writing is better.
Okay? This both ways. I think Rowling knows better techniques as a writer (I mean, she can portray a boy growing up better than a lot of male authors)

2. The actors/actresses who film the movie are talented.
And the ones in Harry Potter aren't? I found this reason on a list of why Twilight is better. So, basically, you are saying that Kristen Stewart is better than Dan Radcliffe? Where does Robert Pattinson fit in? He said he preferred being Cedric to being Edward.

3. Bella is a role model. (She teaches people how to hold onto their friendships and stuff and keep their secrets)
Mmhmm. Sure. She abandoned her friends when she met Edward. When he left she tried to commit suicide by jumping off a cliff. When I have kids, I don't want them to be like Bella.

4. It has a PLOT!!
Shouldn't every novel? It doesn't hold up against Harry Potter arguments.

5. The scenes in the movies are amazing.
Okay. Confession. I have only seen parts of the Harry Potter and Twilight movies. But from what I've seen of Twilight, it's mostly Jacob taking off his shirt, Edward being a creepy-ass stalker, and Bella arguing with someone.

6. The effects are amazing.
Okay, I don't know what you've been watching to say that. I have seen that creepy-ass cgi demon baby. The "werewolves?" Don't even look like regular wolves.

7. A story about a vampire, werewolf, and mortal beat any story about a wand boy and his enemy the beast.
What? That sentence doesn't make sense. For one thing, a creature that sparkles, runs super fast, and sucks blood isn't a vampire. That's a super fast leech-man. Werewolves are only able to turn into wolves on the full moon. They retain no part of their human character while in wolf form, and they are helpless in keeping it from happening. Second, Harry Potter is called a wand boy. What? And Voldy is a beast? First off, this 'beast' killed this 'wand boy's' parents and is a threat to THE ENTIRE FREAKING WORLD. Second off, Voldy isn't a beast. Beasts are creatures without human-like thought processes. They are dumb. (Go archaic for that meaning).

8. The actors and actresses are attached to their character and love them.
You do realise Robert Pattinson hated the part of Edward Cullen, don't you? Kristen Stewart said she burnt her copies of the Twilight script, it was so bad. Do you see actors and actresses from Harry Potter saying that? Oh, Pattinson said he'd rather be known for Cedric Diggory than for Edward Cullen.

9. The characters are not all good or all evil.
Meyer writes out pretty clearly whether the character is good or evil. The most evil a 'good' character gets is jealous.

10. The evil people are villains for a reason like the newborn army in eclipse who almost killed the whole city of seattle or the volturi (they are not evil evil hey have some good in them)
Okay, so are you saying that all antagonists in Harry Potter are "evil evil," as you so eloquently put it? What about: Draco Malfoy, Narcissa Malfoy, Severus Snape, even Fudge to some extent. The only two people who are truly evil are Voldy and Umbridge.

11. The characters in twilight are nice and have a great personality and I are hot and cool too (they are lovable for that).
The characters in Harry Potter are human. They don't have to be hot. They don't have to be "nice". They are human. That means flawed. Flawed characters=better writing. One question: would the characters be lovable if they weren't "hot?"

12. The covers of the books are drawn beautifully.
Yes, they are. But what the heck does it have to do with the series? All editions of Harry Potter have beautifully drawn covers that actually pertain to the story. One other thing: Don't judge a book by its cover.